Letter by Chris Gillis, Puyallup
on March 8, 2012 at 11:14 am
with 110 Comments »

March 8, 2012 11:14 am

After reading this letter attempting to reference the testimony of Sandra Fluke from Georgetown University before Congress, I found it to be another total misrepresentation of her words.

Her testimony was about other students’ problems obtaining reproductive health care and not about her problems. In her testimony she described a student who developed serious health problems as a result of not being able to obtain the necessary care.

What makes this letter even more preposterous is providing reproductive care can make health care less expensive for taxpayers and for everyone who has insurance, not just by preventing unwanted pregnancies but also by preventing serious health problems that would have to be paid for by either an insurance company or the public.

More importantly, it is one thing for an individual who writes a letter to the editor and gets their facts wrong. But it is an entirely another thing for a media professional (or a so-called entertainer when caught in a fix) to continually misrepresent the facts and testimony of an individual citizen.

This reminds me of a famous statement made as a result of similar frustrations during the witch hunt of the McCarthy hearings of 1954 and marked the beginning of the end for Sen. Joe McCarthy: “Have you no sense of decency, sir? At long last, have you left no sense of decency?”

Feeds

Republican leaders and PR people have no integrity when it comes to the misrepresentation of quotes or editing of video material. It is SOP for them.

Sadly, their followers nod in agreement without so much as an internet search with the computers in front of them. It is shameful how much people are willingly ignorant, especially when an obviously intelligent woman is testifying. Just the research would educate them.

CT7 – the people trying to deflect conversation away from the economy are the conseracons who broke it in the first place and do not want people to realize just how much the Administration has accomplished.

CT7 – What is your source that Ms. Fluke is a professional activist? Brent Bozell? She would have received far less publicity if Rep. Issa had not refused her testimony. But perhaps he is part of the great conspiracy to distract America from the economy. He must be beholden to “Oh-Bummer” someway.

BTW, President Obama and his devilish Democrats have stopped the jobs slide that Mr. Bush put us on, and has gained jobs consistently since then. He has reformed health insurance with “Obama care” so millions more, including children, get health coverage that the profit-hungry insurance companies can’t deny on their whim. He restored General Motors to record profitability and saved many thousands of jobs just in that and related industry alone. And he could do a lot more if he weren’t faced with the obstructionist Senate headed by Mitch McConnell whose sole mission is to defeat the President, no matter how much it hurts the country.

Anothe small fact: there were more food stamps issued under Pres. G.W. Bush than Pres. Obama.

Fluke was turned away from Issa because the issue was state vs Church. She has/had nothing to add to the conversation.

Bush started the auto bailouts, BHO just ensured the unions got their ‘fair share’. Ford got nothing and is doing just fine. BHO gave Chrysler billions, and the italians got it a firesale price.

“profit-hungry insurance companies” -private ones should not be??? And educate the group as to their margins. You would be quite surprised.

“Democrats on the committee tapped a low-level staffer to find a witness whose testimony and profile would juxtapose nicely with the tableau of white men Issa planned to call. The staffer found a video clip of Fluke speaking at the National Press Club on Feb. 9, when she was one of several Catholic students to defend the Obama Administration’s ruling. Fluke was eloquent, female and a student at a Jesuit institution to boot. “We couldn’t have picked a better witness,” says a Democratic committee staffer, who would not reveal the identify of the colleague who located Fluke”

concerned? Yes, and it was President Obama who told the original panel to not let her speak, and then he used mind control to have Rush say what he said in a total of nine hours of rant ALL as a political stunt to dupe us all. OF COURSE she is an activist! She is also a citizen and has the right to be heard and to speak! I’m sure that she used her “feminazi powers” to force those people to listen to her sound medical plea whilst at the same time the mind bending of the radio talk show host was FORCED to lead us ALL to believe that the use of the pill requires women to take one every time they have sex THUS leading us all astray with lies.

How about the truth about Fluke, since the conservatives are conjuring up as many lies as possible:

“Sandra Kay Fluke (born April 17, 1981) is an American law student and women’s rights activist[2][3] enrolled at Georgetown University Law Center[4][5][6] who spoke before Democratic members of the House of Representatives on why she believed free contraception is generally essential.”

“Fluke graduated from Cornell University in 2003 and spent five years working for Sanctuary for Families, a New York-based nonprofit aiding victims of domestic violence, where she launched the agency’s pilot Program Evaluation Initiative. She co-founded the New York Statewide Coalition for Fair Access to Family Court, which successfully advocated for legislation granting access to civil orders of protection for unmarried victims of domestic violence, including LGBTQ victims and teens. Fluke was also a member of the Manhattan Borough President’s Taskforce on Domestic Violence and numerous other New York City and New York State coalitions that successfully advocated for policy improvements impacting victims of domestic violence.[9]

While at Georgetown University Law Center, she worked on issues that involved domestic violence and human trafficking.[10]“

Why do conservatives lie? Do they think the rest of us are stupid enough to just accept lies and misrepresented statements and not seek facts?

Pass the koolaide! Obama can also turn back the tides. take credit for the good work of our military, but hides under his desk when the military does something embarrassing like urinating on corpes. Harry Truman had a sign on his desk that said “the buck stops here”. I don’t expect to see him accept the blame for anything though.

“Who lied here? I said she is an activist, not some innocent college kid.”

Her activism has nothing to do with contraception. She is not a college kid, she is a 30 year old law student. Your terminology “innocent college kid” is manipulative at best, sickening is my preference of description.

Lets try the truth:

Fluke has tirelessly worked for a non-profit to help people that are victims of domestic violence. As a 30 year old law student, she pays for the mandatory health care insurance required by Georgetown, but the Catholic School, who is nothing more than an intermediary between Fluke and her insurance carrier, has seen fit to lobby the insurance company to deny contraceptive coverage for women under that policy that is paid for by the women.

Yo, Frosty – I’m not sure what actions you would have President Obama take regarding the urinating on corpses, but if he had done anything that sounded the least bit contrite, our uber-patriotic friends on the right would have screamed “apologist” and “appeaser” at the tope of their lungs.

And it’s laughable for the right to demand accountability; G.W. Bush certainly didn’t care to take accountability for anything and I’ve heard no one on the right take accountability for the Republican sponsored deregulation of Wall Street that got us in this mess, nor the bailout (TARP) that was initiated under Bush and Boehner. They all want to shift the blame to Pres. Obama for not bringing the country out of Bush’s 8-year disaster in 3 years. How about a little accountability from the Republican minority in the Senate who has lodged a record number of filibusters to keep Obama from any achievements regardless of how much it hurts the country?

CT7- Ask yourself, your friends, your neighbors, if you would be better off today under President Obama or if John McCain were in office and continued the Republican policies of President Bush, e.g., hands off Wall Street corruption and predatory banking practices, no constraints on business for pollution or injury to consumers, no constraints on medical insurers to withdraw coverage at will, continuous war, continued subsidies for corporations paying no taxes, off-shoring of jobs, and continued tax breaks for the rich while shoving the ever growing tax burden and deficit onto the backs of the middle class, cutting of medicare and medicaid and cut-backs and/or privitization of Social Security.

TARP was paid back to the nation with a profit. No big union giveaway, not failed green project. Supplied credit and liquidity at time it was badly needed. Also, BHO had a vote. Weak argument.

We would not know how the nation would be under McCain. I was not a big fan and think he was a poor choice for repubs. But, he is not running, so who cares. Because you did not like him last election means nothing today.

BHO left tax rate where they were under BHO. Let’s not forget the majority he had if he truly wanted to change them. Oh, and the Bush tax cuts favored the middle class and poor.

The letter writer is trying to focus your attention on meaningless minutia. Doesn’t matter if she was talking about herself or not, or how many of her friends are dealing with lady problems. Her statement was not “testimony”, her appearance was not at any sort of “congressional hearing”, and she offered zero specifics. Her appearance on the democrat funded Obama campaign ad was a joke, any woman can get contraceptives for a variety of reasons for zero or very little money, with or without insurance.

Mandatory is now “voluntary”? It’s OK for a Catholic College to mandate insurance, but not the Federal Government? Everytime I turn around the Catholic Church gets more rights than the government owned by the people.

Then that means that the insurance mandate part of the “Obamacare” (I used the word you’d understand) is just “voluntary. It’s a “voluntary” contract.

I’m all for leveling the playing field. We need legislation passed quickly to protect men from erectile dysfunction medication and the possible side effects. Before being allowed to purchase said medication, men should have a mandatory (remember it’s voluntary) rectal examination and a cardiac stress test.

From what I see in comments from many men on these blogs, I’m certain that they definitely need the mandatory rectal exam, so checking for the possibility that the erectile dysfunction could be determined by the exam, it would be a two-for-one examination.

CT7 – So how come all the RepubliCANTS are denying TARP and trying to say it just the Democrats who voted for it. Even the RepubliCANTS majority leader trys to pretend he didn’t vote for it. Also under TARP the big Bank CEOs continued to get big Bonuses while using the government cash. The RepubliCANTS said there is nothing we can do, Really?

Also President Obama has reduced taxes for many, like the payroll tax cut and the honoring work tax credit. The Bush tax cuts vastly favored the Rich and again Obama wants to leave them in place for everyone who makes less the 250K or 98% percent of tax payers. One third of the Stimulus package was tax cuts.

Bush expanded Medicare- without paying for it and also two wars on the credit card and on top of the unfunded tax cuts – nice job

Lorna- do you have some deep emotional issue with men? If so you need help outside of a news blog.

But, the voluntary contract she entered into WAS TO GO TO THE SCHOOL. She chose to go to a religious institution.

Most men who are on ED drugs are old. They probably have had a prostate exam.

This is a faux issue, placed in the arena by BHO. Women are doing just fine today. BC is cheap or free. BHO placed the mandate on religious institutions to violate their beliefs.

I tip my hat to the dem PR machine and Pelosi for the stunt of Ms Fluke. Church vs State argument is gone, the conversation is on radio host and women’s healthcare. How many women do you know cannot access BC? NONE! It is free if you are poor or $10! Grow up.

Sorry that you’re ignorant of current events, Lorna. The (manufactured) issue is a Catholic University’s non-coverage of contraceptives, something that Fluke knew when she enrolled for the purpose of fighting the church.

Incidentally, you’re right that nothing is free, and taxpayer funded Title X givaways of contraceptives to cover women’s recreational sex is something I disagree with.

Anyway, always a pleasure to educate the uneducated in these matters. You’re welcome.

“address me please write like an adult.”
“Lorna- do you have some deep emotional issue with men?”

CT7 – no emotional issue. Just enjoying the continual hypocrisy of a conservative male. You want to be treated “write” (sic) like an adult, but you patronize me. Are you opposed to mandatory rectal exams for males diagnosed with ED? If you have a weak heart an ED drug could kill you. We think you need a stress test also – at your cost.

“Sorry that you’re ignorant of current events, Lorna.
The(manufactured) issue is a Catholic University’s non-coverage of contraceptives”

The issue is that the insurance that is paid for by the student (mandatory) is being dispensed in accordance to the Catholic University when it’s none of their damned business. They aren’t paying the bill. They are nothing more than a collective customer director for the insurance company.

Obviously the ignorance is on your part. You can’t educate yourself, much less me.

Sorry Lorna, you lose. Fluke entered Georgetown when she could have entered any one of many, many law schools, for the sole purpose of fighting the church on this issue. She’s a willing tool of the far lefts attempt to steer the public’s attention away from Obama’s economy, nothing more.

I like how Limbaugh sticks his all of the conservative feet in his mouth and now it’s an admirable PR campaign by Pelosi and the Dems.

Did they make Limbaugh say something stupid for 3 days running and then open his show on Monday with “Easy Lover” as the bump music? I guess Pelosi and this professional activist made Limbaugh open his stupid mouth again today.

CT7 – Write like an adult, how about you. All I see is half-truths and obfuscation. Guess I touched a soft spot huh?

Here’s the simple explanation of what I was saying regarding TARP. The right-wingers who voted for it are running away from it now? If you think it was such a great thing as you did in your earlier post why are they running away from it and pretending they didn’t vote for it?

The simple comparison for the stimulus and all the debit that was created under Bush is this when Bush was charging up the credit card we were Not falling off a cliff. But in early in 2009 something had to be done or we were going into a depression and that is the justification for the stimulus compared to all the Bush debit.

sumyungboi – that is what is known as a “baseless assertion”. I guess you are ignorant to the rules of debate.

You have no verifiable proof that she entered that law school with the sole purpose of activism about birth control. Maybe you can tell us if she knew she was going to do this as a child and made sure that she got good grades and went to the right schools prior to applying for Georgetown because she knew this issue would be there waiting.

I’m guessing that you are among the geniuses that know John Kerry knew he’d be running for president in 2004, so he fooled the US Navy into awarding medals and ribbons to him that he didn’t deserve.

How can we trust that a man’s doctor will perform the rectal exam as required? Much like a gynecologist, he could fake the results of the man’s test to appease a patient with whom he has a personal relationship.

The rectal exam for a male getting ED drugs should be observed by a government witness – preferably a woman who would lie to help a man avoid being embarrassed.

This exam can’t be paid for by insurance because the First Church of Women’s Rights says it’s immoral to pay for any exam that might be a slippery slope towards gay marriage.

ehill – Well I know of at least two that voted for TRAP but are running away from it now, Speaker of the House John Boehner and presidential canditate Santorum. And you know there are lots more than just those two.

“Fluke came to Georgetown University interested in contraceptive coverage: She researched the Jesuit college’s health plans for students before enrolling, and found that birth control was not included.”

And for context:

““I decided I was absolutely not willing to compromise the quality of my education in exchange for my health care,” says Fluke”

What a load. There are lots, and lots of very prestigious, secular schools she could have chosen, but focused in on Georgetown. Sorry Lorna, you lose again.

I’d say that Georgetown’s prestigious reputation had something to do with it. You don’t just attend any old law school, since the student loans alone will keep you in debt for the rest of your life. A friend’s son went to Georgetown. He has written his own ticket in the business world. You don’t get that at Podunk U.

What you edited from that little story is that she has spent the last three years lobbying the college about the issue of birth control, so her testimony was no sudden urge. If the college was smart, instead of determined to run someone’s private life, they would have realized that the insurance pays the cost of the drug and the student pays for the insurance. Thus, they were in a place where they shouldn’t have been, but don’t ever think that the Catholic Church will ever come up short on the arrogance scale.

She would have been a momentary blip on the media screen, if not for the help of Rush Limbaugh. Rush made her name a household word, and now you conservatives are trying to make her something terrible because Limbaugh couldn’t shut that overactive mouth of his. I wonder if he’s back on the oxy.

sumyungboi- I read the article and what you dont get is this she wanted to go to Georgetown for the education

Here’s the quote “I decided I was absolutely not willing to compromise the quality of my education in exchange for my health care,” says Fluke, who has spent the past three years lobbying the administration to change its policy on the issue.”

Lorna, the fact that she’s a third year law student, who entered Georgetown for the purpose of fighting the church over the policy since she could have attended any prestigious law school, sort of implies that her testimony was no “sudden urge”, so your little “gotcha” regarding editing is simply more meaningless minutia, one that you didn’t even think through. Third time’s a charm, Lorna.

LornaKardy, you do the same when I post a question for Frida, DON’T YOU answer it. Got it? In fact, I’d prefer it if you Kardy, under any of your various and sundry monikers, never respond to any comments I post on these blogs. That would save a lot of time.

sumyungboi – Have you ever heard the analogy about the word “assume”. Leave me out of it.

Georgetown is a cut above many other law schools. Anyone with a modicum amount of common sense knows that. If she was just there for the activism, why would Georgetown even accept her? I’d say she had to bring the bacon to even be considered.

Can you imagine a law student lobbying? How dare she!!!

I guess you are ignoring this part of the story: “I decided I was absolutely not willing to compromise the quality of my education in exchange for my health care,” says Fluke, who has spent the past three years lobbying the administration to change its policy on the issue.”

afret – sumyungboi is not going to address your question. That’s not part of the talking points to save Rush’s keester.

I hope Rush is the first patient for the mandatory rectal exams. They might find out that the growth on his posterior was a “twin” like Tia Bula had on “My Big Fat Greek Wedding”. My fav chick flick. LOL It helps when you grew up with a Greek family.

Well, afret, you’ve re-quoted what I’d already quoted, but it doesn’t hold water. top-law-schools.com ranks Georgetown law fourteenth. Pretty nice, but that also puts it behind thirteen others, including hyper-liberal Columbia, University of Chicago, and Cal-Berkely.

As to the fact that you’d painted yourself into a corner with your little question, the answer is that the premise of your question is completely flawed. Limbaugh did not spend three days attacking her, and he initially dumped on her because she was simply a liar in a democrat campaign ad cloaked to appear as some sort of official hearing for the purpose of fooling the foolish.

Always my pleasure to clear things up for the uninformed. You’re welcome.

ehill, I posted TWP story above, but yes, I see where you’re going with this, but when you have to argue the meaning of the word “is”, then, well, you’ve kind of lost, don’t you think? I don’t have to walk outside tomorrow at 6:30 in the morning to know that the sun will in fact rise.

sumyungboi – So let me get this straight, the Repulican chair of the committee would not let Ms. Fluke Testify saying she was not qualified. As you say she is an activist, who she is for women’s rights and health care, does that not make her qualified? So the Republican chair was wrong to keep her from testifying? Something that has never happened before in the house were the minority does not get to call a witness

You said her testimony was meaningless, so how could it have been meaningless if you are saying she is an activist for woman’s rights and health care? No one said she was just some person off the street. She knows something about the subject and since when is that not a good thing?

Rush dumped on Ms. Fluke because he could, he did not make any accurate references to her testimony or her ideas presented. He went after her personally saying some really ugly things. She had not attacked him so what would she deserve to be treat like this for three days.

sumyungboi – I remember what it was about and Ms. Fluke was perfectly qualified to testify and the Democrates were denied their right to call a witness. Something that never happened before. I guess Rep Issa was affraid of what she might say.

“65% of the cases at our school, our female students were interrogated by insurance representatives and university medical staff about why they needed prescription and whether they were lying about their symptoms.
“For my friend and 20% of the women in her situation, she never got the insurance company to cover her prescription. Despite verifications of her illness from her doctor, her claim was denied repeatedly on the assumption that she really wanted birth control to prevent pregnancy. She’s gay. So clearly polycystic ovarian syndrome was a much more urgent concern than accidental pregnancy for her.
“After months paying over $100 out-of-pocket, she just couldn’t afford her medication anymore, and she had to stop taking it.”

“when you have to argue the meaning of the word “is”” — I didn’t argue anything of the kind. I asked you to provide a quote from Ms. Fluke that supported your allegation. You’ve failed to do so. So I ask again: where did Ms. Fluke say that she “entered Georgetown for the purpose of fighting the church over the policy”.

If she didn’t say such a thing, then your ONLY grounds for making such an accusation is that you think you can read her mind. Do you think you can read other peoples’ minds?

Loran Doone – You are absolutely right on all points. Keep up the good fight. I notice not a one of the right-leaning ‘contributors’ have condemned Rush Limbaugh. They keep trying to de-legitimize Ms. Fluke as their defense. The point is that Ms. Fluke’s remarks have no relevance to Rush Limbaugh. Whatever her point of view is, there is no justification for Limbaugh’s outragous remarks. And there is even less justification for Republicans and all these upstanding, self-annoited “family values” moralizers to step away from condemning Limbaughs assault on women. They are bullies and cowards, each and every one.

Rush Limbaugh’s advertising exodus is deep into its second week, and despite the radio host’s claim that the impact of 50 companies pulling their business has been negligible, listeners in the nation’s largest media market were treated to over five minutes of radio silence where Limbaugh’s advertisers once stood today.

sorry ehill, I’m not going to play your juvenile little game of “is”. Everyone else seems to have found the “excerpts” just fine, with more thrown in than I needed just for context. You lose.

afret, Fluke, as far as anyone knows, is not an expert in constitutional church / state issues, which was the purpose of the hearing. Fluke was a late afternoon (before a next day hearing) request to substitute for a clergyman whom the democrats had already lined up and who was invited by Issa. Even had Fluke been qualified to speak to the issue of the hearing, (which she wasn’t) there wasn’t time to vet her, and Issa was absolutely correct to turn down the democrats. And as it turns out, she’s not an expert in women’s issues, either, her statement during the filming of the campaign ad can be summed up by saying that she says she know an un-named person having financial woes because of medically needed contraceptives, dubious at best, and that it costs about three thousand dollars over the course of three years for a woman to buy contraceptives. This latter is what’s gotten her ridiculed, and for good reason. She’s either ignorant or she’s lying, you take your pick.

Fluke’s exact words were, “Without insurance coverage, contraception can cost a woman over $3,000 during law school.” Law school is generally 2-3 years depending on specialty.

Fluke testified that she is currently a third year law student. In her testimony, she referred to her friend who has “polycystic ovarian syndrome and has to take prescription birth control to stop cysts from growing on her ovaries”. The friend had to pay $100 a month out of pocket for the pill. $100 a month times 3 years in law school equals $3600, which more than covers the “$3000 during law school” statement. Its simple math.

All of the petty points take away the centrala rguments.

Catholic hiospitals control a monopoly in 18% of the USA, according to the Chicago Archbishop who threatened to close down all Catholic hospitals if they didn’t get their way. Hospitals, that, in fact, have been licensed by the government and must comply with all government regulations, take public money and serve all of the public, not just Catholics.

All of the right-wing evangelicals who think Islam is a threat should consider how Muslims could use their oil money and buy up all kinds of businesses in our communities and then require Sharia law for all their customers, employees, students and anyone else they ahd power over. That, essentially is what the Catholics are doing with this grandstanding.

sumyungboi – Once again you miss the point the minority has always gotten to call a witness and that is a fact. Also the hearing was only called for by Issa that day before so if there was not time then its not the Democrats fault – this is just another phony excuse. And what a better qualified person to call than someone who is affected by these so called church/state issues and has studied them? Come on really! The minority gets to call a witness and that has always been the nature of or democracy, anything less turns a hearing into a sham, which as it turned out it, it was!

tuddo – excellent point, I had not thought of that =, what if Muslims not Catholics own X percentage of hospitals and claimed a religious exemption for whatever under Shari law. The right would be falling all over each other to undo what they are trying to put on us now.

afret, and, if you don’t like it, say the right wing, then work somewhere else or live somewhere else. So, the religious extremists get to buy out your property when you move, house, farm, whatever for cheap and sell it to like-minded religious extremists. Soon we have little religious extremist communities imposing their religious beliefs on all who enter.

And, thinking like an evangelical conspiracy theorist, what if this was Obama’s plan all along. He got the Christian right to think he compromised when really he was just setting up this country to have Shariah law imposed, since we all know he is a secret Muslim. omg

“After days of asking for a witness, they waited until the last minute, the afternoon before the hearing. They asked us to invite Rev. Barry Lynn [head of Americans United for Separation of Church and State] and Ms. Fluke. We said we’ll invite one, per standard procedure. We formally invited Rev. Lynn, and the Democrats, at 4:30 pm, changed their mind and said they wanted Fluke. We said too late. They told Rev. Lynn not to show up the next day.”

Sorry afret, this is where your comment falls to earth.

Tuddo and afret, the muslims can do whatever they want, as long as their religion does not override constitutional law. Where both of you fail is that the Catholics are not attempting to impose anything on anyone, and anyone who says otherwise is dishonest or ignorant. No one forced Fluke to go to Georgetown, and as I’ve shown, there are many other more prestigious law schools, some of them very, very “progressive”. The problem here is the opposite, secular activists and democrat politicians attempting to impose _their_ will on the Catholics, although the secularist progressives are dishonestly trying to frame the debate 360° out of whack.

“what if Muslims not Catholics ..”

What if games are played by the losers for the purpose of building straw men on false premises.

sumyungboi – that it republican side of the story and is contested but I knew you would not mention that little fact. The hearing was only called for two days before and the minority always gets at least one witness. If it were not a sham hearing then why was it not delayed so the minority could have a witness, but no Isaa had to have his little show.

So what your saying about Ms. Fluke is she has no right to go to Georgetown and try to change their polices? Ever hear of freedom of spheech?

“muslims (or Catholics) can do whatever they want, as long as their religion does not override constitutional law.“ You mean like equal protection under the law – that is all Ms Fluke is trying to get, women treated the same as men.

sumy, this isn’t a “what if” game. It is current reality. Catholic hospitals have already tried denying legal health care to women who were in danger of losing their lives because of ectopic pregnancies. Several hospitals have been fined or given sanctions because they refused the patient and doctor’s requests to save the woman’s life. Catholic hierarchy argue that they, not the woman, should have the right to make this decision.

Catholic hospitals are the only choice in many parts of the country, especially rural areas. These hospitals provide emergency care as well as elective procedures. Catholics and evangelicals think the government and/or hospitals should have the power to deny legal emergency medical services based on their religious beliefs, not the woman’s own beliefs.

The Blunt amendment, which all but one Republican supported would have given this power to any employer for any religious reason and started the precedent I was not-so jokingly invoking above.

afret at 7:30: “the hearing was only called for by Issa that day before ..”

afret at 8:31: “The hearing was only called for two days before ..”

Hmmm, which afret is telling the truth? Actually, the hearing had been planned for several days. You’re falling into the ehill game of what’s the meaning of “is”, and it’s dishonest. Everyone knew the hearing was pending, regardless of hard scheduling. Grow up.

tuddo at 8:34: “sumy, this isn’t a “what if” game.”

Then stop playing what if with muslims. You’ve had a couple of comments where, under false premise, you construct a straw man for the purpose of knocking him down. You’re neither reasoned, nor logical, simply another far leftist advocating government involvement in religion.

Intersting how all the men taking Viagra, Cyalia, getting penile implants and/or using vaccuum devices, all paid for by insurance companies or Medicare, have the nerve to complain about paid for birth control pills. Lets cut them off too.

This whole thing has nothing to do with her testimony, any female or male for that manner could have testified. What it is about is a man judging her, calling her vile names, condemning her, all without knowing her. Some of you commenting here are doing the same thing. You don’t have to be a rocket scientist to state what any female or male should know. RL is a bully, no different than a play ground bully, or a grown up bully. Instead of you asking why she should or should not testify, you should ask yourself why do “YOU” listen and allow someone to talk like that and accept it. Ask yourself would you let him talk about your mother, sister, wife, or daughter in that matter? A bully has no respect for any one including themselves. But what is worse is some of you people condone it and make excuses for it.

sumyungboi wrote, “Catholics are not attempting to impose anything on anyone, and anyone who says otherwise is dishonest or ignorant.”

That is a TRUE statement ehill. And you are being intentionally and purposefully ignorant to interpret it any other way, because that serves your purpose. Twisting words again, eh? Try to be HONEST about this.

Catholics are ONLY saying, “We cannot pay for such things, as they are against our core beliefs.”

IF Catholics were attempting to IMPOSE their beliefs on others, they would be picketing in front of pharmacies that dispense birth control to PREVENT people from entering, or hospitals that perform abortions to PREVENT people from entering, or proposing laws and lobbying legislators to pass laws against birth control and abortion to PREVENT people for being able to legally access such.

Some INDIVIDUALs who may be Catholic, may be doing some of these things, as are I am absolutely sure some INDIVIDUALS who may be Presbyterians, Episcopalians, Lutherans, Mormons, Muslims, Hindus, Shintos, or any religion you want to name are doing the same.

BUT! The organized Catholic Church has NOT been given orders from The Vatican or The Holy See to “PREVENT PEOPLE FROM OBTAINING BIRTH CONTROL!” If they have, YOU PROVE IT! I want to see the orders.

Catholics are saying, from the specific direction given by The Pope, that The Catholic Church cannot pay for abortions, or birth control which is the same as abortion. However, if you as an individual, EVEN IF YOU ARE A CATHOLIC, feel the need to get and use birth control or get an abortion, you can get it from wherever it is offered legally, and it is offered in more than enough places so that NOBODY, at least NOBOBY is The United States is being denied or prevented from getting it.

“Catholics are not attempting to impose anything on anyone, and anyone who says otherwise is dishonest or ignorant.”

sumy did RL attack anyone else who testified? Odds are you or any one else would not know much about Fluke’s if it had not been for RL. Another question if a male in his 20’s would have testified to protect himself would he have been berated, called names, chances are no. It could have been reported a lady testified how the cost of bc pills is a burden, and not covered under medical insurance, when it is in fact a prescription but RL had to go on the attack. So instead they had to come up with everything saying it was misrepresented, when in fact she stated her opinion with facts. By the way this is a free country where a person can state their opinion, and should be able to, especially to the people they elect and pay to represent them.

Muckibr,
the Catholic Church tries to impose its will on women accessing health care in their hospitals, as I explained, even for emergency care. If you were a woman rushed to the hospital because of an ectopic pregnancy and chose your life over the life of the fetus, which is legal in most states, why should a Catholic Archbishop get to override your decision and make you die for his religious beliefs?

This has already happened and would happen more often if the Blunt amendment had passed. Look for evangelicals and Catholic Bishops to try to pass it next time. It will pass if more Republicans are voted into office.

tuddo,
I believe I can safely say you are WRONG. Specifically regarding it’s stance on “ectopic pregnancy” which you cited. The Catholic Church does NOT force women in all cases, or for that matter any cases as far as I can determine, to choose the life of the fetus over their own lives in the case of ectopic pregnancy. You say “This has already happened…” but you don’t provide any documentation of when and where and who this has happened to. So, permit me to provide documentation to the contrary of your claim.

Below are a few paragraphs from a reliable source of documentation on The Catholic Church stance on Ectopic Pregnancy Alternatives. I hope you will choose to go to the link and read the entire thing, because if you take the time to read it you will note that it is not a simple issue, and The Church does NOT offer a simple solution like “Fetus live! Woman die!” as you would make it seem.

“Ectopic for Discussion: A Catholic Approach to Tubal Pregnancies”

“On one hand, there can be no direct attack on the child (direct abortion) to save the life of the mother. On the other hand, the life of the mother is equally valuable and she must receive appropriate treatment. It might be that the only available remedy saves the life of the mother but, while not a direct abortion, brings about the unintended effect of the death of the child. Morally speaking, in saving the life of the mother, the Church accepts that the child might be lost.”

“While there are anecdotal accounts of fetuses living to six months without the tube rupturing, postponing surgery indefinitely is dangerous, given the virtual certainty of rupture long before viability. So, it’s one thing to wait a short period of time for miscarriage to occur spontaneously. It’s quite another to forego intervention altogether in anticipation of a life-threatening tubal rupture. Such a high-risk course of action is rightly discouraged and can even be indicative of a reckless disregard for the life of the mother.”

“The course of treatment the woman chooses should be determined by her informed conscience. This means that she must strive to understand the natural law regarding the value of life—her own and the baby’s—and choose a course of action that will respect both. She must also become informed about alternative treatment and the facts related to her own condition. She can then prayerfully discern the course of action she will take.”

Please note the last paragraph above tuddo. The Catholic Archbishop does not have the right to override the decision of the woman. The woman is the final decider of “the course of action she will take.”

I hope you, and others, will read the entire discussion at the link, to determine what The Catholic Church view really is on this issue, rather than making up a scenario that supports ill-informed and preconceived notions. (P.S. It might be a good idea to look-up the terms licit and illicit before to the link.)

tuddo incredibly proposes –
“Muslims could use their oil money and buy up all kinds of businesses in our communities and then require Sharia law for all their customers, employees, students and anyone else they ahd power over. That, essentially is what the Catholics are doing with this grandstanding.”

Sounds good to me for the single reason, that the left would be happy with their best buddies calling the shots and they would finally just shut up. Rational individuals across the nation are sick and tired of listening to delusional, narcissistic lefty hypocrites lie and obfuscate their contrived positions on this contrived that was concocted to distract Americans away from truly pending issues.

You malcontents will chase off your radical Islamic friends after you figure it out the hard way, like the left seems to need to with everything. The left would quit apologizing to and making excuses for their fellow extremist #0ccupist-pals real quick after a couple months under Sharia. Then, finally legitimate and logical topics could be addressed.

How can you libs be this gullible? First you ate up 0bama’s Class War baloney, conned into buying into some magical math equation where another’s wealth can somehow decrease yours without a single computation taking place, but by only it’s property of being a greater figure. Now with his Gender/Moral War 0bama has waged, when his division of classes began to wear off, he has you lefties duped into believing Conservatives sit around in a group eating Viagra while trying to conjure up ways to deny women contraception maybe even healthcare period.

Here is my ‘shocker’ of a prediction :
0bama will not need to expend any effort, in getting the left to bite on the Race War after his current divisive shtick of his starts wearing off. 0bama plays his mindless drones like pawns in his game of facades.

sumy she was stating facts, the cost of a prescription drug, that insurance would not cover, no matter what medical issue the doctor prescribed it for. It is a prescription no different than any other.

ohmy, sorry, but that point has been blown up so many times, it’s comical. Many people have already pointed out that at a DC Target store, women can obtain contraceptives for about eight bucks a month, without insurance. Watch the video, Fluke made no connection between her three thousand dollar per three year law school contraceptive claim and her unknown acquaintance who needs contraceptives to treat a lady disease. Quite the opposite, in fact.

sumyungboi wrote, “Catholics are not attempting to impose anything on anyone, and anyone who says otherwise is dishonest or ignorant.”

WHAT DO YOU CALL THIS?

“65% of the cases at our school, our female students were interrogated by insurance representatives and university medical staff about why they needed prescription and whether they were lying about their symptoms.
“For my friend and 20% of the women in her situation, she never got the insurance company to cover her prescription. Despite verifications of her illness from her doctor, her claim was denied repeatedly on the assumption that she really wanted birth control to prevent pregnancy. She’s gay. So clearly polycystic ovarian syndrome was a much more urgent concern than accidental pregnancy for her.”

sumyungboi – you obviously can’t answer my response so you resort finding slight differences in what I said. I don’t care if it was one day or two the fact is the hearing was rushed so Isaa could put on a show and he did not want any women at that show. So here is my response to yours again and I will repeat again and again until you can explain these facts or agree I am correct

The minority party has always gotten to call a witness and that is a fact. Also the hearing was only called for by Issa a day or two before so if there was not time then its not the Democrats fault – this is just another phony excuse. And what a better qualified person to call than someone who is affected by these so called church/state issues and has studied them? Come on really! The minority gets to call a witness and that has always been the nature of or democracy, anything less turns a hearing into a sham, which as it turned out it, it was!

afret, unlike dissecting minutia, I pointed out that you’d stated two different things only minutes apart, huge difference. There are two possibilitie; you know the truth but are being dishonest, (most likely) or you”re ignorant.

Progressives always have to remember what they say, because progressivism is a dishonest political philosophy. Your comments here are a reason why you’ll never graduate to Oakland.

The study primarily looked at Catholic hopitals, but they noted concerns with Baptist hospitals also. The findings were as follow, byut the examples and specifics discussed show a blatant disregard for the health and choices of the woman.

1. Doctors performed medically unnecessary tests, resulting in delays in care and additional medical complications for patients. These tests were done solely to address hospital administrators’ concerns that the treatment complied with religious doctrine.

2. Doctors transferred patients with pregnancy complications because their hospitals’ religious affiliation prohibited them from promptly providing the medically-indicated standard of care.

3. Hospital administrators interfered with doctors’ ability to promptly provide patients with the standard of care.

sumyungboi – I agree with ehill’s comment. But what the heck is the reference to Oakland?

So you still have not explained why Issa didn’t allow the Democrats to have a witness. He wanted a show hearing and he got but it was recognized for what it was a sham, so much for democracy under the Republicans. If they can’t get what they want legitimately they cheat and break long standing rules in the house that the minority always gets a least one witness.

We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part and abiding by these simple rules.